Hire or reward?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hire or reward?
O.K here's a question for you to ponder.
If a PPL and some pals were to fly in an airshow would they be able to get outside sponsorship (EG from a local company) to cover completely or partially the wet hire costs.
They would make no cash out of it themselves.
Would the CAA go for it?
By the way the CAA have already given the go ahead for them to fly in the show, so this would just be a way for them to save a bit of cash for a one off event (Plus practice flights).
Any thoughts?
If a PPL and some pals were to fly in an airshow would they be able to get outside sponsorship (EG from a local company) to cover completely or partially the wet hire costs.
They would make no cash out of it themselves.
Would the CAA go for it?
By the way the CAA have already given the go ahead for them to fly in the show, so this would just be a way for them to save a bit of cash for a one off event (Plus practice flights).
Any thoughts?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Beware . This is a very dangerous situation.
I can only advise you from the South African perspective, but I should imagine the UK DCA would be similar.
DCA is very tough on any SMELL of money.
As a PPL you cannot even share the cost of a holiday jaunt among friends. Whoever hires the plane has to pay ALL THE COSTS, friends cannot even chip in for the fuel.
Any breach will mean no insuarance cover and posible loss of licence.
I can only advise you from the South African perspective, but I should imagine the UK DCA would be similar.
DCA is very tough on any SMELL of money.
As a PPL you cannot even share the cost of a holiday jaunt among friends. Whoever hires the plane has to pay ALL THE COSTS, friends cannot even chip in for the fuel.
Any breach will mean no insuarance cover and posible loss of licence.
Guest
Posts: n/a
A passenger (or passengers) can contribute to the cost of a plane (in the UK) provided the Private pilot pays the greater percentage (I forget how great - but will look it up again)
I wonder if a sponsor could be treated like a part paying passneger who never gets on the plane......It's a grey area and I guess one only the Caa can answer. The easy answer from them would be NO, but I'm hoping for a reasonable amount of consideration before they reach a decision.
I wonder if a sponsor could be treated like a part paying passneger who never gets on the plane......It's a grey area and I guess one only the Caa can answer. The easy answer from them would be NO, but I'm hoping for a reasonable amount of consideration before they reach a decision.
Guest
Posts: n/a
When I studied my Air Law (3 years ago) the rules stated that if there were up to 4 people on board then the costs could be shared equally between the pilot and passengers, i.e. ¼ each. If there were more than 4 p.o.b. then the pilot must pay for it all (i.e. no shared costs!)
So, to stretch a point but to stay within the law, the sponsoring company could reimburse your (up to 3) passengers costs but, alas, not yours as the pilot (you must pay your share).
I'm fairly sure things haven't changed since my studies, but I'd get CAA confirmation if you want to be sure that you won't break the rules.
So, to stretch a point but to stay within the law, the sponsoring company could reimburse your (up to 3) passengers costs but, alas, not yours as the pilot (you must pay your share).
I'm fairly sure things haven't changed since my studies, but I'd get CAA confirmation if you want to be sure that you won't break the rules.
Guest
Posts: n/a
It would never slide in the US either. IAW myriad FAA legal opinions issued --- mostly over the issue of PPL holders towing gliders --- the cost-free [to the flight crew] flight time would be considered "compensation" in and of itself!
In this country's rather sizable soaring community, it was a hard-fought battle spanning some 30 or 40 years just for tow-pilots towing on a PPL to be allowed to so much as log the time. As late as the 1960's, a PPL with the proper experience requirements could tow, but God help him if he were caught entering the time in his logbook! That particular prohibition has since been lifted, but to this day, it has been on the condition that time logged in this manner by PPL's shall not be credited towards the aeronautical experience requirements of any certificate or rating, unless he can prove that he has paid an equal share of the operating expenses of the towplane! The reasoning? That the higher certificate earned in the process (e.g.: CPL) in itself constituted "compensation".
Reeks of "market protectionism" if you ask me; back in the late 1970's, the total time required for an FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate with an Airplane category rating was jacked up from 200 to 250, expressly for this reason.
------------------
Anybody out after 2 AM is either a turd, a cop or a pilot. Or any combination of the three!
In this country's rather sizable soaring community, it was a hard-fought battle spanning some 30 or 40 years just for tow-pilots towing on a PPL to be allowed to so much as log the time. As late as the 1960's, a PPL with the proper experience requirements could tow, but God help him if he were caught entering the time in his logbook! That particular prohibition has since been lifted, but to this day, it has been on the condition that time logged in this manner by PPL's shall not be credited towards the aeronautical experience requirements of any certificate or rating, unless he can prove that he has paid an equal share of the operating expenses of the towplane! The reasoning? That the higher certificate earned in the process (e.g.: CPL) in itself constituted "compensation".
Reeks of "market protectionism" if you ask me; back in the late 1970's, the total time required for an FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate with an Airplane category rating was jacked up from 200 to 250, expressly for this reason.
------------------
Anybody out after 2 AM is either a turd, a cop or a pilot. Or any combination of the three!
